Bail granted based on insufficient evidence linking the accused to the cause of death and the inadmissibility of her statements against her.

JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

(Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J)

1. Heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for granting of bail to the accused/petitioner namely Rina Begam Barbhuiya alias Rina Begum Barbhuiya, in connection with P.R. Case No. 2156/2025 under Section 61 (2)/103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar.

3. The informant who is the brother of the deceased lodged an FIR on 21.08.2025 alleging inter alia that the wife of the deceased i.e. accused No. 1 was in an illicit relationship with the accused No. 2, which was evident from the Whatsapp chats recovered from the mobile phone of the accused No. 2, and it was revealed from the said Whatsapp conversations that the accused persons had been conspiring to kill the deceased and that it had also come to light that the accused persons misappropriated an amount of approximately Rs. 20,00,000/- kept in the house of the deceased for business purposes. On 10.08.2025, the deceased suddenly died at home. He was taken to Silchar Medical College & Hospital, where he was declared brought dead.

4. The case has already been charge-sheeted and committed to the Court of Sessions and the case is pending for consideration of charge, and in the meantime, the petitioner, who has a 4-month-old child with her, has spent considerable number of days in custody.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the FSL report, wherein it has been found that no poison was found in the viscera examination of the deceased. It is accordingly submitted that the very basis of the prosecution case is that the petitioner had administered poison to the deceased resulting in his death, and there is no such indication in the FSL report, the rest of the allegations are the matters to be considered at the trial, but there is no justification for further incarceration of the petitioner. It is further submitted that what a para-material is available in the charge-sheet regarding administering of Ativan tablets (lorazepam) is confined to the statement of the accused-petitioner recorded by the police, which is otherwise inadmissible in evidence and cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of deciding the bail application.

6. On the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that there is sufficient material in the CD against the present petitioner, who has led the police to the recovery of strips of Ativan tablets from her house.

7. Countering the aforesaid submissions, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that as is apparent from the charge-sheet itself, the Ativan tablets were prescribed to the petitioner by Dr. Ratandip Bose on 27.05.2025 as the petitioner is a diagnosed epilepsy patient suffering from breakthrough seizures, sleep disturbances, anxiety and neurological symptoms, which had been confirmed by Dr. Ratandip Bose himself during police investigation. This explains the recovery of medicine capsules/tablet strips from the dustbin of the house of the petitioner, who was consuming the said medicine for her own treatment. Further, there is no medical or forensic material to establish that the deceased died due to overdose of Ativan tablets.

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions.

9. From the FSL report, it cannot be denied that there is no evidence to show that the deceased died as a result of Ativan/Lorazepam overdose or from administration of any other